There’s been a fair bit of discussion lately about the legitimacy of the international fugitive sometimes referred to as “Captain” Paul Watson.
Some people truly believe in what he’s doing, others find it bizarrely entertaining, and still others absolutely abhor the guy and consider him a terrorist.
Like, people really, really, HATE him.
Whatever you believe, the debate will certainly continue until the last episode of Whale Wars, or until “Captain” Watson ends up behind bars.
I put “Captain” in quotation marks to highlight a furious debate that continues on gCaptain…
What is the prerequisite to be considered a “Captain”, and does Paul Watson meet those criteria?
Personally, I think he’s a total joke and will likely end up hurting or killing someone by accident. However, he is the guy in charge of a ship at sea, so unfortunately, I would have to say that he is a Captain. Not a captain who I think deserves to wear 4 stripes on his sleeve though, that’s for damn sure.
I guess hold a legit certificate makes you one.
Being profesional with other seafarers makes you on also.
Being a tv star and a show off it doesn't.
His only ace is that landlubbers see him as modern Corsair.
It be nice to think an have a romantic view of Sea but.
we be profesionals.
With anxiety, sweat, danger for our families and not for a tv show.
I would consider him a captain under that definition. I'd also consider him a pirate.
I consider him more of a Commodore or perhaps an Admiral in command of a fleet of vessels. You don't need a license to be an Admiral.
I do not know what his formal education is, and quite frankly I could not care less. Trying to prevent the Japaneese from vacum cleaning our oceans for everything that can be eaten is a galant cause and shold be condoned. If they were left alone there would not be any more whales or tunafish left anywhere in the world.
To be a captain, one must hold a Master Mariner or other recognized certificate of competency at the command level. Paul Watson registers his ships as "yachts" to get around marine safety requirements. On board his own vessel he is entitled to the courtesy title of captain, but not outside that context.
The man served briefly as a deckhand on a Canadian Coast Guard vessel; otherwise I'm not aware of any qualifications that he would hold.
I think that you can register what was a ship to be a "yacht", and then have it commanded by someone of lesser qualification (sometimes a lot less) speaks of an inherent weakness in the system. There are plenty of people who are Master of a yacht that do a superb job I'm sure but one wonders how the same ship with people onboard in the same ocean requires lesser training somehow.
Love him or hate him, you should concentrate on his message & not the man.
In this case, the man has made himself – and his methods – the message.
And some of us have first-hand experience with the gentleman; not merely media reports, TV shows and carefully-crafted propaganda.
Me Lucky Charms.
Devon J Liles
Master M/V Sofia
Captain is a rank in the Army, a Master he is NOT.
Why does that photo posted for this comment make me think of Captain Kangaroo? Oh well, there a plenty of boat “captins” out there that are more like Captain Crunch or Mr. Magoo. Same as any profession.
With the article titled “Legit Captain” I think it should have been “Le Git Captain”
thesaurus for git:
idiot twat get bastard annoying asshole jerk fool moron cunt prat arsehole gay jit loser prick redneck twit bitch chav more…
1. Git
1. A completely ignorant, childish person with no manners.
2. A person who feels justified in their callow behaviour.
3. A pubescent kid who thinks it’s totally cool to act like a moron on the internet, only because no one can actually reach through the screen and punch their lights out.
That n00b is behaving like a bloody git.
2. git
Total and utter tosser who is incapable of doing anything other than annoying people, and not in a way that is funny to others. Best used idly. e.g. “Git.”
“You useless git.”
3. git
By definition it’s a “rotter” or a despicable person. In reality in English it’s a colloquialism that affords itself to a more a luckier fellow. Much like a ‘bugger’ whilst the roots of the word are offensive,
Very fitting in my opinion!
Paul Watson should be tossed in a ship's brig, then the ship abandoned. I guess that makes me one who abhors him!
I don't know if he holds a valid mariners credential but that doesn't prohibit some Naval Grad from Annapolis from being a captain on a warship. Looks at the latest article here on captain involving a collision. It appears that a Navy Captain Crunch crossed someones bow without regard to the Rules of the Road.
At least Captain Watson has the courage of his convictions to stand on. That's a refreshing change from the self-centered herd of mediocrity flowing from the maritime and naval academies today.
Although they do kind of look alike, Captain Crunch is only sporting two stripes on his blues, what's up with that? hmmmm
Whether or not someone considers Paul Watson a ‘captain’ boils down to biased opinions. Watson served in the Canadian Coast Guard. He also worked as a merchant mariner. He’s spent his life at sea since the late 1960s — sailed as the master of multiple ships from the Arctic to the Southern Ocean and to damn near every coastline between them. Watson arguably has more experience at sea than many commissioned naval officers and commercial ship captains. So, is a piece of paper required to give him the title of ‘captain’ in every nation on earth? Or is this debate simply invented by those who don’t like him very much and prefer to dig up arbitrary paperwork as an added insult rather than allowing for the obvious.
As for the commentary about Watson’s actions at sea — especially without the historical context and details of those he has frequently opposed (often poachers and IUU fishing) — like any figure who challenges the established norm (in this case unregulated exploitation of the oceans) he is celebrated by many and condemned by many more.
Thank you AnimuX, for the wind of reason on this stormy sea. I totally concur. Paul Watson is not about semantics; he is about opposing the slaughter of whales.
This is a debate by people who had to write 30 written exams, 3 or 4 oral exams and spend years in school to obtain a qualification that he has co-opted to suit his PR strategy.
In what universe is the occasional trip to Antarctica give him “more experience at sea than many commissioned naval officers and commercial ship captains”?
I don’t know about the navy but “commercial ship captains” (the job is Master, the title is Captain actually) spend most months of the year at sea, year after year, steaming between ports. Shore time is usually now measured in hours not days (unless they are jailed like Mr Watson).
I have no qualms with his intent, some with his methods (when he endangers mariners doing their job) but his caricature of a Master is professionally repugnant to me.
And yes, a piece of paper is required to allow him to command ships in every seagoing nation on earth. It’s called a Master Foreign Going, Master Mariner or Master Unlimited and is a very hard piece of paper to obtain. Those of us who have done the hard yards find posers irritating.
Cap'n Crunch is more of a captain than Paul "The Terrorist Fraud" Watson. Cap'n crunch doesn't leave a bad taste in your mouth like Watson. I predict that when he shows up on a Sea Sheperd vessel that their assets located at Friday Harbor, WA will be seized by the US Government for aided and abetting a criminal.
Let's be clear…
1) Mr Watson was employed by the Canadian Coast Guard for only a very brief period as an uncertified deckhand, several decades ago. He would have been expected to learn and practice some basic seamanship skills, not to navigate or to command a vessel.
2) The question was not about the ethics or the moral righteousness of his self-appointed cause, which is a separate topic. The question was about the legitimacy of his anointing himself a "Captain". That honourific has meaning to any professional mariner that is anything BUT arbitrary, as explained (in a previous comment) by SwallowedTheAnchor. It's similar to deeming oneself a "Doctor" (of medicine) without attaining any formal training or credentials.
3) The bogus claims of legitimacy regarding Mr Watson's maritime credentials go to his credibility. He claims many assertions to be factual which simply are not. Those casual observers who are sympathetic to his cause may not seek the nuanced truth (and sometimes outright contradictions) that belie those assertions. This is a form of "confirmation bias" (look it up) that he uses to his advantage.
4) By the way, you'll note (should you check) that Mr Watson's methods (reckless, unethical, megalo-maniacal, dangerous to others) are often opposed as much by environmentalists as by the "establishment".
5) As to the "righteousness" of his beliefs? Hey, even a broken clock is right, twice a day.
Well said…
You can’t take away his commitment to saving the whales. I don’t see anybody else doing it. The fact that he is a pompous asshole doesn’t diminish that. HIs command tactic of nudging his crew toward any particularly dangerous task and then acting like it’s their idea doesn’t seem too ‘Masterly’ to me, but that’s just me. He does look rather dapper with his four stripes, though, doesn’t he? I don’t know what he had to do to award himself the ribbons on his coat, but I had to work for mine (I found that It’s not that easy to knock down six milk bottles with one baseball at the county fair).
Still, you’ve got to hand it to the dude for putting himself on the line for something that we all should believe in.